Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.programming > #2036 > unrolled thread

informatic and university

Back to article view | Back to comp.programming

Contents

  informatic and university "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-08-08 18:41 +0200
    Re: informatic and university "osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2012-08-08 14:42 -0500
      Re: informatic and university "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-08-09 10:31 +0200
    Re: informatic and university "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-08-09 08:33 +0200
    Re: informatic and university Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-08-09 13:36 +0100
      Re: informatic and university "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-08-09 18:12 +0200
        Re: informatic and university Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-08-09 17:47 +0100
    Re: informatic and university Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-10 01:12 -0700
      Re: informatic and university malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com - 2012-08-11 03:40 -0700
        Re: informatic and university "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-08-11 20:05 +0200

#2036 — informatic and university

what academics master to people at university?

there is some evidence they know some programming language
as C or C++ or assembly for some cpu?

so if they not program, what teach in university? logic?
who know logic in all this planet? [no one]

in other words i claim that no one know logic...
who know if i'm wrong or right? :) [i'm not 100% sure
of that...]

Algo
for example they could write down one function for
divide 2 big numbers without consult any text
but using only what they know of how the division work?
[to write it in one implemented language
as x86 asm or C or C++ in a real pc not with a language
that not exist in a turing machine that not exist]

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#2037

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.programming
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 11:41 AM
Subject: informatic and university


> what academics master to people at university?
>
> there is some evidence they know some programming language
> as C or C++ or assembly for some cpu?
>
> so if they not program, what teach in university? logic?
> who know logic in all this planet? [no one]
>
> in other words i claim that no one know logic...
> who know if i'm wrong or right? :) [i'm not 100% sure
> of that...]
>
> Algo
> for example they could write down one function for
> divide 2 big numbers without consult any text
> but using only what they know of how the division work?
> [to write it in one implemented language
> as x86 asm or C or C++ in a real pc not with a language
> that not exist in a turing machine that not exist]

WRT "logic"

You are using two quite different meanings for "logic" As you say, street
logic is quite rare, symbolic logic or whatever a syllabus calls it
nowadays, is a different animal.  The latter has a very constrained field of
view.

For another example. think of "implication" and what its derivatives means
to the average person.  I would rather have an example from another field
but it is the best I can do at the moment.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2041

"osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:a8ftpiF3naU1@mid.individual.net...
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid>
> Newsgroups: comp.programming
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 11:41 AM
> Subject: informatic and university
>
>
>> what academics master to people at university?
>>
>> there is some evidence they know some programming language
>> as C or C++ or assembly for some cpu?
>>
>> so if they not program, what teach in university? logic?
>> who know logic in all this planet? [no one]
>>
>> in other words i claim that no one know logic...
>> who know if i'm wrong or right? :) [i'm not 100% sure
>> of that...]
>>
>> Algo
>> for example they could write down one function for
>> divide 2 big numbers without consult any text
>> but using only what they know of how the division work?
>> [to write it in one implemented language
>> as x86 asm or C or C++ in a real pc not with a language
>> that not exist in a turing machine that not exist]
>
> WRT "logic"

logic it is only one: the language Someone wrote Mathematic and Physic

than there is one algorithm language;
why not use for that language x86 assembly or C or C++ without
UBs and with fixed know size type
or if the algo is in mathematic: Maple or Mathematica?

why use one language not run in a PC?

> You are using two quite different meanings for "logic" As you say, street
> logic is quite rare, symbolic logic or whatever a syllabus calls it
> nowadays, is a different animal.  The latter has a very constrained field of
> view.

unsuccesful for what i think...

> For another example. think of "implication" and what its derivatives means
> to the average person.  I would rather have an example from another field
> but it is the best I can do at the moment.

thank you

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2040

"io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> ha scritto nel messaggio 
news:5022953e$0$17946$4fafbaef@reader1.news.tin.it...
> what academics master to people at university?
>
> there is some evidence they know some programming language
> as C or C++ or assembly for some cpu?
>
> so if they not program, what teach in university? logic?
> who know logic in all this planet? [no one]

i say that because i make a google search
name of one professor of informatic in a near university
+ the word "printf("
and the name of that prof + "cout"
and the result is: only documents that that prof
not wrote...

> in other words i claim that no one know logic...
> who know if i'm wrong or right? :) [i'm not 100% sure
> of that...]
>
> Algo
> for example they could write down one function for
> divide 2 big numbers without consult any text
> but using only what they know of how the division work?
> [to write it in one implemented language
> as x86 asm or C or C++ in a real pc not with a language
> that not exist in a turing machine that not exist]
>
>
>
>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2042

"io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> writes:

> what academics master to people at university?
>
> there is some evidence they know some programming language
> as C or C++ or assembly for some cpu?

Bjarne Stroustrup is a professor at Texas A&M University.  He knows a
bit of C++.

Closer to home, when I was what in the US goes by the generic term "a
professor" (but in the UK was "a lecturer") I had the pleasure of
working with colleagues such as Michael Lesk (now a professor at
Rutgers) who knew a bit about C, and Simon Peyton-Jones who certainly
knew "some programming language" (Haskell in this case).  He was also a
dab hand at assembly programming.

But, really, it's invidious to pick any examples.  Your question
suggests you've had some bad experiences, but universities are full of
people with a huge range of knowledge and skills, programming, included.

> so if they not program, what teach in university? logic?
> who know logic in all this planet? [no one]
>
> in other words i claim that no one know logic...
> who know if i'm wrong or right? :) [i'm not 100% sure
> of that...]
>
> Algo
> for example they could write down one function for
> divide 2 big numbers without consult any text
> but using only what they know of how the division work?

Donald Knuth is a professor at Standford.  He knows a thing or two about
computer arithmetic.  But your question is interesting.  Why does your
test of proficiency exclude consulting the wast wealth of human
knowledge?  I'd always pick a programmer who consults a text over one
who does not (and, coincidentally, Knuth's book is often a good text to
start with).

> [to write it in one implemented language
> as x86 asm or C or C++ in a real pc not with a language
> that not exist in a turing machine that not exist]

-- 
Ben.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2043

"Ben Bacarisse" <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:0.b199aff2090040120d09.20120809133620BST.87mx24xmwr.fsf@bsb.me.uk...
> "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> writes:
>
>> what academics master to people at university?
>>
>> there is some evidence they know some programming language
>> as C or C++ or assembly for some cpu?
>
> Bjarne Stroustrup is a professor at Texas A&M University.  He knows a
> bit of C++.

yes a bit... i joke he know too much...

> Closer to home, when I was what in the US goes by the generic term "a
> professor" (but in the UK was "a lecturer") I had the pleasure of
> working with colleagues such as Michael Lesk (now a professor at

yes, closer your home, *in the US*

> Rutgers) who knew a bit about C, and Simon Peyton-Jones who certainly
> knew "some programming language" (Haskell in this case).  He was also a
> dab hand at assembly programming.

> But, really, it's invidious to pick any examples.  Your question
> suggests you've had some bad experiences, but universities are full of
> people with a huge range of knowledge and skills, programming, included.

we hope this...

>> so if they not program, what teach in university? logic?
>> who know logic in all this planet? [no one]
>>
>> in other words i claim that no one know logic...
>> who know if i'm wrong or right? :) [i'm not 100% sure
>> of that...]
>>
>> Algo
>> for example they could write down one function for
>> divide 2 big numbers without consult any text
>> but using only what they know of how the division work?
>
> Donald Knuth is a professor at Standford.  He knows a thing or two about
> computer arithmetic.  But your question is interesting.  Why does your
> test of proficiency exclude consulting the wast wealth of human
> knowledge?  I'd always pick a programmer who consults a text over one
> who does not (and, coincidentally, Knuth's book is often a good text to
> start with).

easy because instead of copy one algo from the book, [something 9 year
old baby can do] one has to
translate the algo he know in mathematic, [i hope we know how to do
division with pencil and paper] to the language of choice, this
show if someone know how formalize algo, how
implement algo [at last this algo] in the language of choice

instead the first show he know how copy from the book...

>> [to write it in one implemented language
>> as x86 asm or C or C++ in a real pc not with a language
>> that not exist in a turing machine that not exist]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2044

"io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> writes:

> "Ben Bacarisse" <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> ha scritto nel messaggio
> news:0.b199aff2090040120d09.20120809133620BST.87mx24xmwr.fsf@bsb.me.uk...
>> "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> what academics master to people at university?
>>>
>>> there is some evidence they know some programming language
>>> as C or C++ or assembly for some cpu?
>>
>> Bjarne Stroustrup is a professor at Texas A&M University.  He knows a
>> bit of C++.
>
> yes a bit... i joke he know too much...
>
>> Closer to home, when I was what in the US goes by the generic term "a
>> professor" (but in the UK was "a lecturer") I had the pleasure of
>> working with colleagues such as Michael Lesk (now a professor at
>
> yes, closer your home, *in the US*

My writing was not very clear.  I taught in the UK.  I was merely
talking about the terms used.  In the UK a lecturer is something like an
associate professor in the US (once you have tenure, in so far as that
exists anymore).

<snip>
>>> for example they could write down one function for
>>> divide 2 big numbers without consult any text
>>> but using only what they know of how the division work?
>>
>> Donald Knuth is a professor at Standford.  He knows a thing or two about
>> computer arithmetic.  But your question is interesting.  Why does your
>> test of proficiency exclude consulting the wast wealth of human
>> knowledge?  I'd always pick a programmer who consults a text over one
>> who does not (and, coincidentally, Knuth's book is often a good text to
>> start with).
>
> easy because instead of copy one algo from the book, [something 9 year
> old baby can do] one has to
> translate the algo he know in mathematic, [i hope we know how to do
> division with pencil and paper] to the language of choice, this
> show if someone know how formalize algo, how
> implement algo [at last this algo] in the language of choice
>
> instead the first show he know how copy from the book...

Have you seen The Art of Computer Programming?  You can't really copy
the algorithms from the book, you have to understand them first.

Anyway, even with books from which you *can* copy, that was not my
point.  You seemed to value not consulting any text, I was saying that I
do value it.

<snip>
-- 
Ben.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2047

On Aug 8, 5:41 pm, "io_x" <a...@b.c.invalid> wrote:

> what academics master to people at university?
>
> there is some evidence they know some programming language
> as C or C++ or assembly for some cpu?

I was taught a couple of programming languages. And bits of assembler
and
machine architecture.

> so if they not program, what teach in university? logic?
> who know logic in all this planet? [no one]

boolean algebra (basically "logic"), programming, relational
databases, algorithms
including big-O notation, basic data structures (trees, lists, hash
tables), machine
architecture and basic elections, analog computing (it *was* a long
time ago),
some "structured programming" (it was fashionable at the time),
propositional
calculus

> in other words i claim that no one know logic...
> who know if i'm wrong or right? :) [i'm not 100% sure
> of that...]

I don't know what "knows logic" means. Logic is for philosophers and
theologians.
they have to map the ambiguities of human language into formal
language.
Mathematicaians and computer scientists have an esier tiem of it as
they only
have to deal (mostly) with the formal language representations.

Boolean algebra is a simple form of logic. Hardware engineers call
what they do
"logic"

> Algo
> for example they could write down one function for
> divide 2 big numbers without consult any text
> but using only what they know of how the division work?

I'm sure I could figure it out. But why not look it up? Much smarter
people than
me have spent many years studying the problem. I'm sure my algorithm
would
be pretty naive. or I could just download a bignum package. Why
reinvent square wheels?

> [to write it in one implemented language
> as x86 asm or C or C++ in a real pc not with a language
> that not exist in a turing machine that not exist]

I don't think I'd enjoy doing long division on a Turing machine.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2057

בתאריך יום שישי, 10 באוגוסט 2012 09:12:53 UTC+1, מאת Nick Keighley:
> On Aug 8, 5:41 pm, "io_x" <a...@b.c.invalid> wrote:
> 
> I'm sure I could figure it out. But why not look it up? Much smarter
> people than me have spent many years studying the problem. I'm sure 
> my algorithm would be pretty naive. or I could just download a bignum 
> package. Why reinvent square wheels?
> 
> 
It's the Lego problem. There's are lots of bignum packages out there.
But often they come in library form, and it's too difficult to get the
end user to link. Or they're written in C++ and don't have copy 
constructors, so you can't use them with the standard template library.
Or you're using Javascript. Or the stupid compiler throws a warning saying
that strcpy is unsafe deprecated (it's used in the bignum to string function), 
so that's the end of that. 

-- 
For a bignum library, plus much more see my book, Basic Algorithms
http://www.macolmmclean.site11.com/www

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2059

<malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> ha scritto nel messaggio 
news:c754ac34-b998-47c7-a1a6-1c41e9dad836@googlegroups.com...
?????? ??? ????, 10 ??????? 2012 09:12:53 UTC+1, ??? Nick Keighley:
> On Aug 8, 5:41 pm, "io_x" <a...@b.c.invalid> wrote:
>
> I'm sure I could figure it out. But why not look it up? Much smarter
> people than me have spent many years studying the problem. I'm sure
> my algorithm would be pretty naive. or I could just download a bignum
> package. Why reinvent square wheels?

#because someone like numbers?

It's the Lego problem. There's are lots of bignum packages out there.
But often they come in library form, and it's too difficult to get the
end user to link. Or they're written in C++ and don't have copy
constructors, so you can't use them with the standard template library.
Or you're using Javascript. Or the stupid compiler throws a warning saying
that strcpy is unsafe deprecated (it's used in the bignum to string function),
so that's the end of that.

#yes if i understand it...
-- 
For a bignum library, plus much more see my book, Basic Algorithms
http://www.macolmmclean.site11.com/www 

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.programming

csiph-web